Transcript

4.
The Research Works Act SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON FEDERAL AGENCY ACTION. • No Federal agency may adopt, implement, maintain, continue, or otherwise engage in any policy, program, or other activity that-- ◦ (1) causes, permits, or authorizes network dissemination of any private-sector research work without the prior consent of the publisher of such work; Authors: Reps Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and Darrell Issa (R-CA) - and Elsevier?

5.
Effects of the RWA and Elseviers stance - their content? - long-standing frustration with publishers (and scientific amateurism?) - surprise at costs (RLUK negotiations in 2011) Warning: thinking out loud in public... (25+ posts/articles) a mateur at work

8.
Why should we adopt open access? For the sake of the public ‣ they paid for it (largely) — shouldnt they own it? ? ‣ they want access (e.g. patient groups) ‣ democratic necessity ‣ changes the dynamic of public engagement ‣ increased public demand good for Science?

10.
Why are we not there yet? Publishers ‣ adherence to a profitable model. Hence: ‣ insistence on copyright acquisition ‣ Elsevier support for RWA ‣ confidentiality clauses on subscription deals ‣ Can publishers be part of the solution? (Or has Elsevier given everyone else a bad name?) ‣ They have to be!

11.
Why are we not there yet? Funders/Governments ‣ Wellcome leads the way ‣ but only 55% compliance ‣ Weaker support from RCs ‣ encouraged but not properly resourced ‣ about to change...? Finch, RCUK policy 5 Sept 2012 Cost? Length of transition? Effect on green OA? International co-ordination?

12.
Why are we not there yet? Scientists ‣ ignorant of ‣ obligations and how OA works ‣ subscription costs ‣ a problem with access (in wealthy institutions) ‣ concerns for scientific societies ‣ weak sense of public duty? ‣ conservative - fear of losing a traditional model ‣ invented the web but suspicious of it? ‣ addicted to impact factors

13.
Impact factors: dont get me startedAug 2012 Kill them now (partner) Welcome Trust OA policy: The Trust "aﬃrms the principle that it is the intrinsic merit of the work, and not the title of the journal in which an author’s work is published, that should be considered in making funding decisions."